Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rudedog who wrote (42370)	3/25/2001 1:11:48 AM
From: QwikSand	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 64865

Dog, I must say I still don't get the point you're making. If we let the numbers speak for themselves, then everybody's numbers today say "Oh, shit". But the numbers up until the time of the crash showed Sun gaining share and growing faster than anybody else, regardless of how many commodity boxes Compaq was selling per month...which was probably more before than it is now. Sun didn't have an "end-to-end" solution then either. So what is it you're trying to say again? That Sun's increasing share and superior growth "may not be sustainable" after we reach equilibrium again (whatever that turns out to be) because they don't sell PC's, even though that didn't matter much before...and even though the relative mix is slowly shifting away from PC's? Well, I at least congratulate you for not making the kind of thundering, confident-sounding predictions that we hear from many of the other Sun naysayers on the board. --QS

To: rudedog who wrote (42370)	3/25/2001 1:18:48 AM
From: Charles Tutt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 64865

Sun doesn't have to sell PC's. You can get them plenty of other places. Do you want end-to-end or PC-to-end? And the bottom line is, who cares? This discussion started with you telling me how insignificant PC's were to Compaq except to the extent they allowed CPQ to claim they could provide end-to-end solutions, and now you seem hung up on the PC's domination of the desktop. I guess I just don't get the point. Sun servers will work with PC's from whoever. And if the "end" doesn't have to be PC's, they can provide entry level Solaris systems. Why should Sun dissipate its energy trying to compete in a commodity PC market that provides insignificant profits to one of its largest players? And then we start to hear about how cool VMS is. Are we going back in time? Maybe somebody should pull out the RT-11 floppies and claim imminent world domination. If you call CPQ and tell them you need servers, what do they offer you -- Win2K? Tandem? VMS? Unix? RSX? CP/M, maybe?! That's called fragmentation and lack of focus. JMHO, as usual. Charles Tutt (TM)